|
|
Posted by Jerim79 on 04/12/07 20:20
On Apr 12, 11:01 am, Rami Elomaa <rami.elo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Jerim79 kirjoitti:
>
> > As for the loop that was given, it may surprise you that I don't label
> > my variables as $VariableX. Variables should have unique names that
> > signify what they are. Seeing as how I have unique names for my
> > variables, a loop there becomes impractical. Unless of course I
> > utilize pointers, which is open to a matter of discussion of whether
> > it is worth it or not.
>
> Okay, so variables have unique labels, that doesn't mean they still
> couldn't be handled in a loop. I'll just tell you what I personally
> would do, and I'm not trying to say this is how you should do it.
>
> Php's arrays can be both indexed and associative, I'd use the lable
> strings as keys instead of numbers.
>
> Okay, so the variables aren't called $variable1, $variable2, but let's
> say Peter, Paul and Mary, etc... So just make a array of them:
> $my_labels = array('Peter', 'Paul', 'Mary',);
>
> Collect the values from form:
> foreach($my_labels as $key)
> $my_values[$key] = $_POST[$key];
>
> Then check for errors:
> foreach($my_values as $key => $val)
> if (empty($val)){
> $msg[$key] = " * You have not answered this question.";
> $error++;
> }
>
> You still have them as uniquely named array indexes... (indices? whatever..)
>
> I believe that for the new guy this code would be readable, and
> identifying problems should really not be any more difficult with this,
> plus I think that it actually might save some time to write the actual
> code from the beginnig, even though it's not at it's final stage,
> instead of first writing everything spread out, and then rewriting the
> same code again cleaned. If anything, writing the code twice will only
> introduce new bugs which still would need to be detected.
>
> However, my original intent was not to concentrate on the bad code, err,
> your personal style of writing test code, but to draw your attention to
> the fact that there was so much of it. When you write to a forum such as
> this, requesting for help, do concider trimming the code to a very very
> short piece where the problem is shown. If you post several hundreds of
> lines of code, who's gonna start reading it all? Most just take a
> glimpse at it and think "spaghetti!" and ignore it. Had you isolated the
> problem to less than 20 lines, people might've actually paid attention
> to it and been able to help you with it. You see, people in c.l.php have
> the patience of an adhd child high on sugar. If the problem isn't solved
> within 10 seconds, it's ignored. If you expect a person to spend an hour
> reading your entire code and parsing it in their head, you wont get any
> help and have to solve the problem by yourself.
>
> I'm sure you have your own style of coding and after reading your
> explanation you've convinced me that you may not actually be entirely
> rookie in coding. The difficlty seems to be that you've not yet grasped
> the fine skill of posting a question to usenet. I wouldn't want to think
> that this was all waste of both of our time, so I'll try to learn the
> lesson here and not judge people and their code so harshly, if you'll
> consider sending shorter piece of sample code the next time you post,
> agreed? :)
>
> A final word on refusing to use loops is an educating story on Worse
> Than Failure (formerly known as The Daily WTF) that you might want to
> read:http://worsethanfailure.com/Articles/Checking_Your_Digits.aspx
>
> --
> Rami.Elo...@gmail.com
>
> "Wikipedia on vähän niinq internetin raamattu, kukaan ei pohjimmiltaan
> usko siihen ja kukaan ei tiedä mikä pitää paikkansa." -- z00ze
Perhaps I was too hasty in my original reply and if so, I apologize. I
certainly don't want to take all my frustration out on one person.
Having been around programmers for a while, I have run into the "My
way is the only way" attitude. Perhaps I am too quick to pounce on
anyone who I think exhibits that behavior, even if they don't. My
apologies. I always love to learn new things.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|